Comparison of the shear bond strengths of two different polyetheretherketone (PEEK) framework materials and CAD-CAM veneer materials

BMC Oral Health. 2024 Apr 12;24(1):444. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-04247-0.


Background: This study evaluated the shear bond strength (SBS) of two different polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and CAD-CAM materials after aging.

Methods: A total of 42 frameworks were designed and milled from 2 different PEEK discs (Copra Peek, P and BioHPP, B). P and B frameworks were divided into 3 subgroups (n = 7). 14 slices were prepared each from feldspathic ceramic (Vitablocs Mark II, VM), hybrid nanoceramic (Cerasmart, CS), and polymer-infiltrated ceramic (Vita Enamic, VE) blocks. After surface preparations, the slices were cemented to P and B surfaces. The samples were subjected to thermal aging (5000 cycles). SBS of all the samples was measured. Fractured surfaces were examined by SEM/EDX analysis. The Shapiro-Wilk, Two-way Robust ANOVA and Bonferroni correction tests were used to analyze the data (a = .05).

Results: Frameworks, ceramics, and frameworks x ceramics had significant differences (p < 0.05). The highest SBS value was seen in B-VM (p < 0.05). VM offered the highest SBS with both P and B. The differences between P-VM, P-CS, P-VE and B-CS and B-VE were insignificant (p > 0.05). According to EDX analysis, ytterbium and fluorine was seen in B content, unlike P. While VM and CS contained fluorine, barium, and aluminum; sodium and aluminum were observed in the VE structure.

Conclusion: Bonding of P and B with VM offers higher SBS. VM, CS and VE did not make any difference in SBS for P, however VM showed a significant difference for B.

Keywords: BioHPP; CAD-CAM materials; PEEK; Shear bond strength.

MeSH terms

  • Aluminum*
  • Benzophenones*
  • Computer-Aided Design
  • Fluorine*
  • Humans
  • Ketones
  • Polyethylene Glycols
  • Polymers*


  • polyetheretherketone
  • Aluminum
  • Fluorine
  • Polyethylene Glycols
  • Ketones
  • Benzophenones
  • Polymers